These are my first thoughts on Call of Duty WW2, and if you enjoyed it, or even are curious for what I had to say, subscribe to my channel! Thanks!
Pretty decent review. For my taste, it's neither good nor bad. It's a CoD game, after all. I play them for a week and move on with my life.
I always rate a game by how often I return to it after completion. So far the graphics are amazing and the content is a little loose on historical accuracy, but it was needed at times to tie the the story together. The Liberation level is a nice change of pace. Overall, though I have not completed the campaign, I think it's well done.
Good review, I made a thread only a few days ago covering this somewhat.......http://ww2f.com/threads/are-games-like-battlefield-1-and-cod-ww2-good-or-bad.70234/#post-817637
Well, Call of Duty World War 2 is a great game series that I had waited for to play this game. This game is worth buying and I had observed that there are so many changes which included from flinch to weapon balancing and some small tweaks are also designed which had made this game better. Before I Call of Duty World War 2 kaufen, I had read on this page about this game which had gave me some information regarding the requirements of the game. After buying, it had definitely have gave me a standalone gaming experience.
The moment I found out there were Black men and women on the Whermacht side, I gave up on the franchise as a whole.
Sorry KJ, that wasn't very clear. Call of Duty WW2 developers decided to make available black men and women to players on multiplayer for the German side. I know it's a game, and it's trying to be inclusive and fair to everyone, but come on, black women in the German Army? To me that's a slap to the face of veterans and historical accuracy, and it's beyond the typical unrealistic level Call of Duty reaches, it's absurd. I'm not a racist or feminist, but that to me was taking it way too far. Call of Duty never was really appealing to me, and World at War was the best they ever offered, but even that was ridiculous to a good extent. I know it's a game for entertainment, but I still think there are some lines you don't cross when it comes to historical accuracy.
Ah...now I understand. Don't worry, I wasn't making an accusation or insinuating anything, just confused. I see what your saying. I linked an article on a thread a month or so ago and it had a similar theme, "Show me the money!" That's what it boils down to, especially for the multiplayer mode. The higher the appeal to the masses the more subscriptions they will sell. Sad state of affairs if you ask me. Having played WWII online, it is a mess. You have no idea who anyone is. All I look for is the red enemy tag. World at War will go down as one of the best. It was an intense game and provided a campaign that was engrossing. Even the musical score was excellent.
As a game, it fits the criteria for the consumers, that's all they care about sadly. Red Orchestra 2, and the Rising Storm series are extremely impressive in realism and graphics, and there are two new games, Hell let Loose and Post Scriptum: The Bloody Seventh that look very promising and realistic.
Call of Duty World War 2 gives a breathtaking experience that redefines World War II for a new gaming generation. It is one of the best multiplayer game which marks a return to original, boots-on-the ground Call of Duty gameplay.